Kavanaugh Hearings

[Sbriggs]

12 hours ago, mpt said:

I completely disagree with your 2nd last paragraph.  If his nomination is withdrawn and he is innocent, then you can make allegations about anyone if you want to change a political outcome.  If he’s innocent he should be sworn in, if he is guilty he shouldn’t.  You can’t punish someone for doing nothing wrong if nothing wrong was done.

Whether he's guilty or innocent, he's fore sure a liar. He should not be put on the bench if he can't tell the truth. Noway he can answer NO to all those questions, and if that wasn't the act of a guilty man I guess I don't know what is. His manner and attitude said everything

[PhillipBlunt]

1 hour ago, Ghostsof1915 said:

There's an easy solution. Start voting for independent candidates. Ones that will actually listen to the electorate. Isn't that what democracy is all about? 

That's not the way God tells people to vote in 'Murica.

[OneSeventeen]

12 hours ago, mpt said:

I completely disagree with your 2nd last paragraph.  If his nomination is withdrawn and he is innocent, then you can make allegations about anyone if you want to change a political outcome.  If he’s innocent he should be sworn in, if he is guilty he shouldn’t.  You can’t punish someone for doing nothing wrong if nothing wrong was done.

I understand and support what you're saying, innocent people should not have to face the consequences or any sort of scorn for being wrongfully accused. I think that's a noble and idealistic principal. But I don't think it can be applied in this case because we cannot conclude guilt or innocence based on yesterday's proceedings. Even if an FBI investigation were to happen, Mark Judge, his ex-girlfriend, Debbie Ramirez, Julie Stewnick and who ever else were to testify. I don't think we can get to the full truth of what happened. I think it would certainly shed more light into Kavanaugh's character but I don't think we can definitively arrive at the truth. That's sort of the crux of my argument as to why he should withdraw or should be withdrawn.

 

His nomination and if confirmed, his career as a Justice on the Supreme Court will forever be tainted by politics, scandal and mistrust. How can the public trust, respect and uphold the rulings of one of their most important legal institutions, a third of their federal government, if someone they ultimately do not trust is confirmed to a lifetime position of power? Brett Kavanaugh is not the only person qualified to sit on the Supreme Court. If it were me I would withdraw from the nomination myself because I believe it is important for a democratic society to trust it's institutions. I don't think my ego or my pain in being wrongfully accused is worth dividing our country and damaging the integrity of its highest court. Personally withdrawing IMO would be the patriotic thing to do.

 

3 hours ago, DrJockitch said:

Kavanaugh’s Response Pretty much follows the pattern of every powerful man who has been accused of similar. He gets self righteous and angry.  All he needed to do was say the woman wasn’t attractive enough for him to bother assaulting her and he would have gone full Trump. 

 

Fact is is he did his best to downplay his behaviour in his youth and to paraphrase said he was a saint in high-school, a saint in university and a saint now. 

 

Had he acted like a man and said what is patently clear that he drank to excess at times and wasn’t in control of his behaviour at times.  Explained that he had no recollection of this event and that if it had happened the way she said it did he was truly sorry and added some platitudes about praying on it and such, the debate would be over. The Republicans would happily of pushed him through. But he can’t even be honest about being a hard partying teenager. 

 

I don’t think it matters in the end. Lyndsey Graham and Orrin Hatch gave word to what every powerful man with a skeleton that was sitting in that chamber thought, they thought about themselves first.  I believe that every person in that room believed Dr. Ford, some just didn’t think that was enough to even slow down Kavanaugh’s inevitable confirmation. 

 

Over the last two years I have said the American’s won’t do that it is just too crazy, too far even for them and have been proven wrong every time. So this time I am saying they will push it out of committee this morning and vote him onto the bench next week. They will do this while blaming Democrats in wild conspiracy theories for ruining the reputation of this fine man while contuing to D-Calif the four women who have come forward insignificant and liars. After all what is four more women after the bus load that came forward about the Sexual Assaulter in Chief. 

 

‘Oh and I say this as a white man who grew up with some degree of privilege while living in the US. 

I'm still trying to process what this moment means. All I can say for now is that 11 male senators, men of significant privilege and power, did not know how to compassionately treat a woman who was brave enough to face them and share the most tragic experience of her life so they hid behind Rachel Mitchell. I'm watching the judiciary committee live right now and I'm just sickened and heartbroken. Voting against Kavanaugh's nomination isn't the same as saying he's guilty of sexual assault.

Edited September 28, 2018 by OneSeventeen

[Sbriggs]

10 hours ago, redhdlois said:

Can't compare that with this situation.  Young children were abused by adults in the church......

and woman were by white men as well.....

[PhillipBlunt]

11 minutes ago, Chicken. said:

According to his testimony the FBI has looked into his background half a dozen times and never found anything of the sort. Most recently the FBI did a background check for this nomination.

 

Of course the guy is angry, his family

is getting death threats and he has to explain the horror that is US politics to his children at a tender age. His reputation is under attack by a media that has a strong grasp on public opinion and always cling to a good story. All for something he categorically denies happened and the people claimed to have been there refute any memory of being there or this happening (under penalty of a felony)

 

He welcomed another FBI investigation for this incident but everyone knows if it gets prolonged another month or two and if the dems win the midterms then he wont get the job he has served decades to attain. All while this allegation will likely get lost in the wind. 

 

Im obviously in the minority here but he seems genuine and not to discount Fords past trauma since it was probably someone else who did the assaulting... she just conveniently remembers it was him and it was conveniently brought forward a week before the vote idk.

 

Looks like the vote is going forward regardless

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Please tell me you don't have a daughter.

[Guest]

14 minutes ago, Chicken. said:

He welcomed another FBI investigation for this incident but everyone knows if it gets prolonged another month or two and if the dems win the midterms then he wont get the job he has served decades to attain. All while this allegation will likely get lost in the wind.

I really don't think he did. He did everything but commit to agreeing to that - he doesn't want it, else he'd have said right off the bat 'I will happily wait three months for the FBI to conduct a thorough investigation to clear my name and allow my nomination to proceed'. That's what any innocent person would have done - but the only reason not to ask for an FBI investigation is...if you know there's something there that's going to lose you the nomination.

[PhillipBlunt]

10 hours ago, redhdlois said:

I'm female and I just shake my head at all these women suddenly digging up the past.  It just seems like the 'latest' thing to do.

 

Yeah those women and their stupid repressed psychological terror that they've struggled with and been haunted by for years, sometimes decades. Why do they feel the need to burden such a great and wonderful society with such trivial matters as men who force themselves upon them?

[DrJockitch]

13 minutes ago, Chicken. said:

According to his testimony the FBI has looked into his background half a dozen times and never found anything of the sort. Most recently the FBI did a background check for this nomination.

 

Of course the guy is angry, his family

is getting death threats and he has to explain the horror that is US politics to his children at a tender age. His reputation is under attack by a media that has a strong grasp on public opinion and always cling to a good story. All for something he categorically denies happened and the people claimed to have been there refute any memory of being there or this happening (under penalty of a felony)

 

He welcomed another FBI investigation for this incident but everyone knows if it gets prolonged another month or two and if the dems win the midterms then he wont get the job he has served decades to attain. All while this allegation will likely get lost in the wind. 

 

Im obviously in the minority here but he seems genuine and not to discount Fords past trauma since it was probably someone else who did the assaulting... she just conveniently remembers it was him and it was conveniently brought forward a week before the vote idk.

 

Looks like the vote is going forward regardless

 

Yes, but she had nothing to do with when it was brought forward.  She brought this forward in July when the selection process was going forward.  She never asked to have her name made public.  She was just trying to be a good citizen and say that this is who this man is, take that into consideration when choosing who to bring forward.  She didn't ask to be thrust into the spotlight, in fact quite the opposite.

 

Kavanaugh did not welcome an FBI investigation, in fact the angry man who says he has been wronged and wants to clear his name would not answer questions about whether he would welcome that.  All of the alleged victims that have come forward have asked for the FBI to investigate it is only Kavanaugh, Mark Judge and the Republican party who don't want this.  The Anita Hill investigation took 2 days by the FBI.

 

In regards to it being convenient for her to remember it is him, that is just wildly off base, she didn't want any of this.  To describe any of this as a convenience for her is incredibly belittling and insulting to a women who has been through a horrible and very, very, very common situation.

 

There is still plenty of time before the November elections to look into all of these claims.  

 

Really I am not sure this makes much difference in the end.  They will ram him through, but even if they didn't there is a list of equally right wing judges to pick from for Trump to feed his base.  

 

In the end it will likely just energize the democratic base more going into the elections and frankly that is probably the game the Democrats are playing.  For the Republicans again it is incredibly ironic to hold this up and say it needs to be rammed through as they held up Garland for 16 months.  We haven't learned anything new about either of these parties and they are both culpable for this incredibly mismanaged situation.  

[Ronaldoescobar]

Just one more nail in the coffin..

[chon derry]

17 minutes ago, Captain Azzy said:

I really don't think he did. He did everything but commit to agreeing to that - he doesn't want it, else he'd have said right off the bat 'I will happily wait three months for the FBI to conduct a thorough investigation to clear my name and allow my nomination to proceed'. That's what any innocent person would have done - but the only reason not to ask for an FBI investigation is...if you know there's something there that's going to lose you the nomination.

that and he really doesn't like  orange cep't for donalds face 

[Canada Hockey Place]

Partisanship aside in 30 years we have not progressed. 

 

1998 "I did not have sexual relations with that woman"

 

2018 "I never sexually assaulted anyone in high school or at any other time"

 

 

[Warhippy]

7 hours ago, Lancaster said:

Most I've read just primarily focused on the event in question, I had no idea about the other accusations after that.  

If that's the case, then it's a different story.  Open him up like a book.  

If and I do say IF the other alleged victims are to be believed and Mark Judges book as well it sincerely shows Kavanaugh is a liar at the absolute best and party to harrassment and assaults at the worst.

 

Regardless of whether he is guilty or not, his lying about his past alone shows he does not have the temperment or impartiality to sit as a judge on the supreme court

1 hour ago, RUPERTKBD said:

I think Hippy said it best on page one.....of the two, it was the victim who was far more composed under questioning. The accused got angry, sniped at the people asking questions and had his description of himself from the Fox interview shown to be a lie...

 

There is no burden of guilt or innocence, this is not a criminal trial. It is, in essence, a job interview, one that Kavanagh failed, IMHO.

 

From his misrepresentation of his high school and college life in the Fox interview, to refusing to answer questions, he has shown himself to be unworthy of a post on the highest court in the country.

 

There are many other qualified candidates. Even hard core Conservatives, such as the GOP wants. We all know Trump had his heart set on BK, because of his stance on whether a sitting President can be charged with a crime, but it's clearly time to move on to plan B,

 

TBH, as someone who finds the current state of the Republican party to be despicable, I am torn. On the one hand, I see a huge issue with this candidate attaining a lifetime appointment to SCOTUS, but OTOH, I see the GOP paying a price at the polls both in November and in 2020, as undecided women (and those who may have voted fro Trump out of distaste for Hillary) realize how much they matter in the eyes of the Republican party and say "Enough!".

Agreed.  His statements about conspiracy theories, his obvious bias against an entire segment of the population based on their political leaning shows he would be entirely unwilling to follow the word of the law based on personal bias.

 

Voting him in now only shows that the GOP is ready to do whatever it takes to hold power.  They would not be voting on guilt or innocence but on the belief he is the best man for the job.  After yesterday I sincerely find it hard to believe THIS is the best man or person for the job

1 hour ago, RUPERTKBD said:

I'm not sure about that.

 

Watching BK's testimony, I believe that his anger and outrage are real. He honestly believes that he is innocent. The most likely scenario, IMHO, is that the incident happened as Dr. Ford describes it and Kavanagh doesn't remember it, because he was too drunk.

 

Mark Judge is the wildcard. He either was too drunk and like Kavanagh doesn't remember, or he's lying to cover for his friend. He's already on record saying that he never saw Brett engage in the kind of behavior described by Ford, which, considering the writings in BK's yearbook, suggest that he's being less than honest.

 

I think it really comes down to the fact that Kavanagh and the entire GOP don't want an FBI investigation because it might delay the process long enough for the mid-terms to happen and the Republicans to lose the house and maybe even the Senate. They see getting this done quickly as the only way to be 100% sure that they get the chance to appoint Kennedy's replacement.

 

IMO, they really don't care about Ford, or whether the allegations are true. They want that seat on the Supreme Court and all other considerations are unimportant.

Yup.  At best he's a liar.  At worst a drunk without boundaries who lied about his past.

 

I've been accused of something similar before.  I asked for an investigation immediately by our site supervisor.  Turns out she was angry because I not only would not give her access to our site based on her credentials but also had fired her BF from a site a few months before.  The claims were nto sexual in nature but sexist as she claimed I said a woman has no job on a site.

 

Regardless at that time I was in my mid 20s and could not risk that kind of damage to my reputation so I demanded it be looked at and was told I couldn't be on site until it was cleared up and stood a chance of losing that contract.

 

A man who is guilty usually does not want to answer direct questions.  Does not want to be investigated.  A man who is innocent will hedge appropriately but has no problems answering said questions nor do they change their stories or worry if they're investigated for it.

 

\In my personal belief Kavanaugh is absolutely guilty of something, But regardless of guilt or innocence does not have the temperment to be on the SCOTUS

Edited September 28, 2018 by Warhippy

[JM_]

1 hour ago, Chicken. said:

According to his testimony the FBI has looked into his background half a dozen times and never found anything of the sort. Most recently the FBI did a background check for this nomination.

 

that doesn't prevent new evidence or testimony from coming forward that requires another look by the FBI. None of the previous checks mean anything other than Ford and others hadn't come forward yet.

 

If we took that view of things priests would be let off the hook for their past wrongdoing too. 

[JM_]

I expected the hyper-partisan types like Graham to do their thing, but its really the complicit cowards like Flake and a few other moderates that are going to let this happen. 

[Blue Jay 22]

A motion to supoena Mark Judge was shot down, and the vote will take place at 1:30 ET.

 

They are collectively entering a point of no return.

[Rim Jobson]

It would seem there's quite a few feminists posting in this thread, and that's ok. What's not ok in my opinion is that for the most part you all seem to believe this woman's allegation without any evidence to back it up. What I've seen here in this thread so far is something to the effect of - 'a woman accused a man of a sexual assault! She must be telling the entire truth without fabrication and therefore he must be guilty!' - oh, and if you happen to disagree, well then I hope you dont have a daughter. Ridiculous.

 

You folks here realize that there was no rape, right? The accuser admitted this much herself. She named witnesses who could not corroborate her story, and one that had never even heard of Brett Kavanaugh. Although maybe they were all just a bit forgetful considering it's now 36 years after the "fact". The accuser certainly forgot a few things along the way.

I dont condone rape or any sexual assault by any means, but I'm not willing to accept every woman's accusation at her word as gospel. In this era of #MeToo where a woman can define an assault just about any way she likes and as far back in the past as she wants - effectively destroying her target's name, family, livelihood - WITHOUT CONSEQUENCE if she's not telling the entire truth or even outright lying to suit her own agenda - that I personally will not support either. Just wait until one of you virtuous knights in shining armor who believes every word every woman says, crosses the wrong woman, and she accuses you of a similar travesty. You WILL change your tune. I for one need cold hard evidence of a crime to believe it. Unfortunately that's hard to come by when a crime is not reported for decades.

[Scottish⑦Canuck]

I think it's pathetic what is going on in America.

 

Almost beyond belief.

[Scottish⑦Canuck]

2 minutes ago, Rim Jobson said:

It would seem there's quite a few feminists posting in this thread, and that's ok. What's not ok in my opinion is that for the most part you all seem to believe this woman's allegation without any evidence to back it up. What I've seen here in this thread so far is something to the effect of - 'a woman accused a man of a sexual assault! She must be telling the entire truth without fabrication and therefore he must be guilty!' - oh, and if you happen to disagree, well then I hope you dont have a daughter. Ridiculous.

 

You folks here realize that there was no rape, right? The accuser admitted this much herself. She named witnesses who could not corroborate her story, and one that had never even heard of Brett Kavanaugh. Although maybe they were all just a bit forgetful considering it's now 36 years after the "fact". The accuser certainly forgot a few things along the way.

I dont condone rape or any sexual assault by any means, but I'm not willing to accept every woman's accusation at her word as gospel. In this era of #MeToo where a woman can define an assault just about any way she likes and as far back in the past as she wants - effectively destroying her target's name, family, livelihood - WITHOUT CONSEQUENCE if she's not telling the entire truth or even outright lying to suit her own agenda - that I personally will not support either. Just wait until one of you virtuous knights in shining armor who believes every word every woman says, crosses the wrong woman, and she accuses you of a similar travesty. You WILL change your tune. I for one need cold hard evidence of a crime to believe it. Unfortunately that's hard to come by when a crime is not reported for decades.

Good grief... This post reeks of insecurity.

[HerrDrFunk]

2 minutes ago, Scottish⑦Canuck said:

Good grief... This post reeks of insecurity.

All his posts regarding women do. He's got some pretty deep seeded issues there. I don't even know where to begin unpacking that last post of his because, woof.

 

[riffraff]

7 minutes ago, Scottish⑦Canuck said:

Good grief... This post reeks of insecurity.

How so?